Dialog International

Martin Mosebach on Benedict XVI

The Frankfurt novelist Martin Mosebach has a nice tribute to Benedict  XVI on the op/ed page of today's New York Times.  Benedict is "close to God, but far from Germany":

Pope Benedict XVI may be convinced that democratic institutions have as little right to interfere in the structure of the church as all the many emperors and kings who tried to do as much in past centuries. This stance has made him unpopular among his fellow German clergymen, who are intimidated by contemporary culture, but it also fascinates intellectuals who are far removed from the church, and who aren't swayed by any superficial rhetoric of reconciliation. In Benedict, they see the authentic representative of a religion that they don't know whether to view as still dangerous or possibly as the only remaining counter to a secular society.

But one comment might damage Mosebach's book sales in Munich:"The great novelist Heimito von Doderer once said that all of Bavaria can be divided into a small group of butchers and a larger group of people who look like butchers."

I am currently trying to make my way through Mosebach's  Das Bett; it is rough going. The best book about Frankfurt I've read is Valentin Senger's Kaiserhofstrasse 12, a true story about a Jewish working-class family who somehow survived living in Frankfurt in the NS-period by their own wits but also through the courageous help of strangers. I read it in one sitting (coincidentally on a plane from Frankfurt to New York).

Blessed Relativism

Reading the reviews of Pope Benedict XVI it is interesting that his attack on the "dictatorship of relativism" is seen by many as a an attack on Europe.  In fact "relativism" is often a code word for Europe - something to be deplored. ( I should add that there is little evidence that most of these reviewers have actually read Joseph Ratzinger's writings on relativism. ) The neoconservative Weekly Standard equates relativism with the moral and economic collapse of Europe. 

Does anyone doubt that Western Europe is tumbling downward? It cannot summon the will to reproduce itself. It has aborted and contracepted its birthrate down toward demographic disaster: perhaps 1.4 children per couple across the western end of the continent, when simple replacement requires a rate around 2.1. It can discover neither how to absorb nor how to halt the waves of Islamic immigrants swamping its cities, and it has proved supine in the face of those immigrants' anti-Semitism, anti-Christianism, and even anti-Europeanism.

Meanwhile, Western Europe's economies are soft, its unemployment rates are shocking, and its emerging continent-wide government is elitist and antidemocratic. Its people are hedonists and materialists, its soccer clubs are nativist militias in waiting, its churches are empty, and--well, that's the problem Joseph Ratzinger faces, isn't it? The newly elected Pope Benedict XVI has just inherited the world's greatest pulpit, but, on his home continent at least, there's hardly anyone in the pews to listen.

The neo-fascist weekly Junge Freiheit has an essay this week (by Dr. Karlheinz Weissmann)  that attacks the moral depravity of Protestantism in Germany.  The culprit? Relativism.

Das wird im besten Fall seine Anziehungskraft auf die ernsthaften Geister nicht verfehlen, die die „Diktatur des Relativismus“ als unerträglich empfinden und deren Bereitschaft wächst, sich mit den eigentlichen Gefahren für die Fortexistenz Europas auseinanderzusetzen.

The only solution is to submit to the doctrinal orthodoxy in Rome.  Even more bizarre, relativism is seen by some as the creation of German "nihilists":

Ironically, it was Joseph Ratzinger's fellow Germans who gave us the diabolical idea that moral absolutes are nonsense - nihilists such as Nietzsche and Nazis such as Heidegger. French philosophers such as Foucault and Derrida then corrupted the faculty of reason with their postmodernist assault on truth.

Postmodernist thought is alive in many ideological isms: subjectivism, historicism, multiculturalism, deconstructionism, moral relativism and nihilism. It is the work of leftist academics at war with the Catholic concept of natural law. But others have promulgated this invidious idea.

This week an angry reader (J.H.Cohen) wrote to the New York Times complaining about judges "who ground their beliefs in an fashionable moral relativism and post-modern European nihilism."  Okay, which is it?  Are Europeans moral relativists or are they post-modern nihilists? Because the two are mutually exclusive: one group accepts the multiplicity of truths and the other denies truth altogether.

The answer, of course, is neither.  I was a student at German universities in the 1970's - not long after Joseph Ratzinger had his "Saul on the Road to Damascus" conversion from liberalism to orthodoxy in Tübingen. The universities were hardly hotbeds of relativism or nihilism.  On the contrary, there were a multitude of orthodoxies - mostly of a Marxian variety.  The students agreed in a universal moral standard - they were not relativists - but their universal moral standard happened to have a content different from Catholic doctrine. 

The view that totalitarian ideologies like National Socialism and Leninism are somehow based on relativism is false.  Equally false is the view that Catholic orthodoxy always stood against totalitarianism  We need to avoid putinizing history.  Daniel Goldhagen, author of Hitler's Willing Executioners  weighs in on the subject in an interesting essay in Die Presse:

Benedikts Verschmelzung von Nazi-Horror - ein Bekenntnis extremer Intoleranz - mit der Moderne und heutigem Pluralismus unter dem Titel des "Relativismus" ist offensichtlich bizarr. Sie ignoriert auch einige Fakten: Im Gegensatz zu dem, was Benedikt in seinen Memoiren ausdrücklich behauptet, leistete die Kirche kaum Widerstand gegen die Nazis. Während die Kirche einerseits dem Nationalsozialismus in vielen Bereichen Widerstand leistete, kollaborierte sie in anderen Bereichen freiwillig mit dem Nationalsozialismus und Faschismus. Christliche Intoleranz und Antisemitismus waren die Grundlagen für die Entstehung des radikalen Antisemitismus der Nazis sowie dafür, dass die Nazis so viele Christen in ihren Krieg gegen die Juden einbinden konnten. Und während die Kirche nicht für den Holocaust verantwortlich war, ist es aber auch eine Tatsache, dass wesentliche Teile der Kirche den Nazis bei der Judenverfolgung begierig behilflich waren. So unterstützte die Kirche etwa die antisemitischen Rassengesetze der Nazis und Faschisten, und das slowakische Episkopat erklärte der slowakischen Nation, warum ihre Regierung, angeführt von einem Priester, die Juden des Landes deportieren müsste. In Bezug auf Juden war die Kirche kein fundamentaler Gegenpol, sondern Teil des Problems.

Bolton and Germany

Steve Clemons has an interesting post up about how John Bolton can be expected to be received IF he is approved as our next UN ambassador:

Tonight I helped host the Chairman of the Free Democratic Party of Germany's Parliamentary Group, Wolfgang Gerhardt, at a forum organized by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation. 

If a coalition of the Christian Democrats and Free Democrats displaces the governing coalition of Social Democrats and Greens in Germany's next election, Gerhardt may very well emerge as Germany's next foreign minister.

He gave a lucid, sensible talk -- quite brave in fact for speaking so candidly about some of the problems that lie ahead with China, Israel-Palestine, and Iran policy.

Someone in the audience knowing my rather serious interest in John Bolton's future asked what Gerhardt thought of Bolton's nomintation to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.

Knowing that he could probably not answer such a diplomatic question directly, I suggested a re-phrased question which went something like:

I know that America is in need of a new Ambassador to Germany. (pause)  Might Germany welcome John Bolton to that post?

The answer from Wolfgang Gerhardt:

In the case that Mr. Bolton might become Ambassador to Germany, it might make best sense to deal directly with the U.S. government here in Washington rather than through an emissary.

I thought it was a clever response -- and then it reminded me of Condi Rice essentially doing the same thing when she appointed her own U.N. advisor -- distinct, separate, and independent from John Bolton.

Let's hope the senators on the Foreign Relations Committee display some integrity and courage and Bolton will never represent the United States.

Neocons to the Rescue in Germany

New York Times reporter Mark Landler believes that Germany is sliding into a recession:

In their semiannual report on the German economy, submitted Tuesday, the six institutes said: "Almost no other country in the European Union has had a development in recent years that was so unfavorable. Obviously, the German economy is suffering from fundamental weakness."

Given such weak underpinnings, economists said it was quite possible that the German economy, Europe's largest and an engine for much of the Continent, could fall into a recession - classically defined as two consecutive quarters of contraction.

But this, they said, would scarcely be different from the current state of affairs.

"Trend growth in Germany is now so low that you can easily meet the technical definition of recession," said Thomas Mayer, the chief European economist at Deutsche Bank in London.

Fortunately, Jeff Gedmin of the Aspen Institute Berlin has the answer for Germany: a revolution!

Laßt Ihnen freien Lauf, den Verrückten! Vielleicht ist es Zeit für eine Revolution in Deutschland. Zur Auflockerung würde ich empfehlen, ein paar Aktien zu kaufen. Oder mal bei Rot über die Ampel zu gehen. Oder beim nächsten Umzug das Einwohnermeldeamt nicht zu informieren ... Guten Morgen, Deutschland. Wer weiß schon, was der nächste Tag bringen wird?!

Brilliant!  Buy a few stocks and dare to jaywalk!  Who pays for this neocon think tank?  Oh.

Blogger Key in Blocking John Bolton

Future historians will marvel at the ability of the Bush Administration to launch a full-scale invasion of a foreign country based on false intelligence, aided by a dishonest and incompetent press.  It does seem like more Americans are waking up to the magnitude of the deception (Gallup Poll Results Published April 26, 2005):

Half of Americans (50%) say the Bush administration deliberately misled Americans about whether Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. This is the highest percentage that Gallup has found on this measure since the question was first asked in late May 2003. At that time, 31% said the administration deliberately misled Americans. This sentiment has gradually increased over time, to 39% in July 2003, 43% in January/February 2004, and 47% in October 2004.

The nomination of John Bolton  as UN ambassador has allowed us a glimpse behind the curtains of the Bush Administration.  John Bolton has made his career on intimidating people to produce results that his superiors want - even if the results are patently untrue.  It is clear that he threatened career intelligence officers to product false intelligence on WMDs in both Cuba and Syria - and then lied about this to the senate committee vetting his nomination. 

If the Bolton nomination fails, it will be due in part to the work of blogger Steve Clemons.  His blog The Washington Note has served as a clearing house for information on Bolton, and has been a safe haven for honest and dedicated people in the State Department to come forward with the truth about Bolton and other neocons.  Steve is fulfilling the role that the free press used to play in our country.  In today's post he eloquently states why his blog has been critical in this process:

If those of us involved in the Bolton Battle have done anything, we helped create a political space that sensible Democrat and Republican politicians could get into to think less like robots over this nomination -- and to ponder the big issues that Bolton's nomination has pushed to the surface. For that, this blog is proud -- and whether we win or lose this battle over John Bolton -- it was absolutely the right one to fight with the White House.

I want the White House to show to what absurd lengths it will go to push a candidate so disdainful of the United Nations, so disdainful of principled American engagement in the world, so disdainful of dissent and debate among colleagues on the AMERICAN side of the equation, so disdainful of the realities of delicate diplomacy in vital national security matters, so disdainful of the U.S. Congress to the point of lying outright to them about his past, so disdainful of the separation of powers in our government.

Steve, thanks for your good fight.  You are a true American patriot.

The Putinization of History

Russian president Vladimir Putin raised some eyebrows the other day when he called the collapse of the Soviet Union "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the last century."  Earler Putin had angered former east-bloc countries by calling the Hitler-Stalin Pact "historically justified."   Putin's efforts to rewrite history are putting a damper on the festivities planned in Moscow next month to celebrate the end of "the Great Patriotic War."  Anne Applebaum writes about this today in her WaPo column:

But if we are to avoid turning the anniversary of the end of World War II into a celebration of the triumph of Stalinism, more should be done. To begin with, Congress should vote on a resolution proposed this month by Rep. John M. Shimkus (R-Ill.), which calls on Russia to condemn the Nazi-Soviet pact as well as the illegal annexation of the Baltic states. "The truth is a powerful weapon for healing, forgiving and reconciliation," the resolution states, in a burst of unusual congressional eloquence, "but its absence breeds distrust, fear and hostility."

Bush, too, should show that he understands what really happened in 1945. Every recent U.S. president has visited Auschwitz, and many have visited concentration camps in Germany, too. Perhaps it's time for American presidents to start a new tradition and pay their respects to the victims of Stalin. This is made difficult by the dearth of monuments in Moscow, but it isn't impossible. The president could, for example, lay a wreath at the stone that was brought from the Solovetsky Islands, the Soviet Union's first political prison camp, and placed just across from the Lubyanka itself. Or he could visit one of the mass-execution sites outside of town.

Of course these would be nothing more than purely symbolic gestures. But a war anniversary is a purely symbolic event. Each commemoration helps all of us remember what happened and why it happened, and each commemoration helps us draw relevant lessons for the future. To falsify the record -- to commemorate the triumph of totalitarianism rather than its defeat -- sends the wrong message to new and would-be democracies in Europe, the former Soviet Union and the rest of the world.

Few writers know more about historical truth in Russia than Anne Applebaum.  Her history of the gulag should be required reading for all students of 20th centruy history (preferably read together with Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn).  Meanwhile, the people of Lithuania are resisting the Putinization of History: President Valdas Adamkus will refuse to participate in the festivities in Moscow on May 9.  Alexander Budde has an excellent report on German Radio about the remaining bitterness of Lithuanians towards Russia.  Don't mention the word Liberation to them:

Okkupation, Deportation und Verhaftungen, die entsetzliche Tragödie des Holocaust,Konzentrationslager, erzwungene Emigration - das waren die Folgen zweier totalitärer Regime für die litauische Nation. 350 000 Litauer wurden ermordet, verhaftet oder in Straflager verschleppt. Und als der grausamste Krieg in der Geschichte offiziell vorbei war, gingen die Verbrechen in Litauen weiter. Es gibt keine einzige Familie, die nicht Verluste und Terror erlitten hat.

Von ”Befreiung” könne keine Rede sein, so begründet der litauische Präsident seine Weigerung, bei der Siegesfeier am 9. Mai in Moskau dabei zu sein. Ein Affront gegen den russischen Gastgeber, zumal der estnische Amtskollege Arnold Rüütel mit einer fast gleich lautenden Erklärung für einen weiteren Paukenschlag in Richtung Russland sorgte. Doch Valdas Adamkus steht zu seinem Wort:

As for the view of Vladimir Putin on the street, here is how one person interviewed responded.

Gar nichts halte ich von Putin! Von Demokratie will der nichts wissen. Der will doch bloß dem Stalin ein Denkmal setzen mit dieser Feier.

Is American history in danger of becoming Putinized?  Sadly, yes.

Council of Europe: US has "betrayed its highest principles"

Today the Council's Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights has issued a clear condemnation of the United States Government for the unlawful detention and abuse of prisoners at Guantánamo:

The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights considers   that, through its practices surrounding detentions at Guantánamo Bay, the   United States Government has betrayed its own highest principles. Guantánamo   Bay is not a “legal black hole”: international human rights law has at all   times been fully applicable to all detainees and for those captured during   now-ceased international armed conflict in Afghanistan, protection of certain   rights may have been complemented by the provisions of international   humanitarian law for the duration of that conflict.

On the basis of an extensive review of legal and factual   material from a wide range of reliable sources, the Committee concludes that   the circumstances surrounding detentions by the USA at Guantánamo Bay show   unlawfulness on grounds including the torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading   treatment of detainees and violations of rights relating to prisoner-of-war   status, the right to judicial review of the lawfulness of detention and the   right to a fair trial. The Committee also finds that the USA has engaged in   the unlawful practices of secret detention and “rendition” (i.e. the removal   of persons to other countries, without judicial supervision, for purposes such   as interrogation or detention) and that US proposals to return or transfer   detainees to other countries in reliance on “diplomatic assurances” risk   violating the principle of non-refoulement.

The Committee therefore calls on the US Government to   ensure respect for the rule of law and human rights by remedying these   situations. It further calls on member states to protect the situation of   persons from their countries who are or have been detained at Guantánamo and   to ensure that they do not contribute to and are not complicit in such   unlawfulness. Finally, the Committee calls on the Committee of Ministers to   transmit its concerns to the US Government, reminding it of its obligations as   an observer state to the Council of Europe and recommends measures to ensure   monitoring of the future implementation of the Committee’s proposals.

The FDP representative and former federal justice Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger commented:
„Unsere lange erkämpften Rechtsstandards dürfen auch in dieser Situation nicht geopfert werden.“

Fischer's Testimony

I haven't posted anything about the "Visa Scandal" since I'm not familiar with all of the intricacies of the charges and countercharges.  Evidently the CDU senses that Joschka Fischer is vulnerable here, and has been making the most of the scandal in the runup to the elections next month in NRW.  I also know that the fallout from the scandal has damaged the relations between Germany and the Ukraine: the euphoria following the the Orange Revolution has quickly subsided.

Yesterday, Fischer testified on live television for nearl 12 hours and proved himself as master of the "rope-a-dope" technique: admitting mistakes, taking blame and then firing back at his political opponents.  (from Reuters)

"The responsibility is mine. Write it down, Fischer is to blame," he said in a hotly anticipated appearance broadcast live on German television. "I should have been informed and taken action earlier than I did. That was my failure."

But after admitting mistakes, a combative Fischer shifted gears and in sharp exchanges with commission members denied looser visa policies put in place by his ministry were directly responsible for the problems on Germany's borders.

Looking composed in a sober black pinstriped suit and trademark wire-rimmed glasses, Fischer also accused his opponents of using the visa affair, which has badly damaged his image and support for his Greens party, for political gain.

"They are doing this because they want me out of the way,"  Fischer said. "But for that this is simply not enough."

The visa affair has received prominent play in the German press since allegations of widespread abuses at the German consulate in Kiev surfaced at the start of the year.

It has touched a nerve in a country where many citizens are fearful that low-paid eastern European immigrants are snatching their jobs.

The conservative opposition have jumped at the opportunity to attack Fischer, a close ally of Gerhard Schroeder who, despite his tarnished image, is still seen as crucial to the Chancellor's re-election hopes.

Fischer played down the seriousness of the charges, but if his policies led to thousands of criminals entering Germany, and he ignored the warnings about this, then it has to be a serious matter.  It is admirable that he subjected himself to this televised grilling and admitted his own guilt in the affair.  That is a nice contrast to Bush administration officials like Condoleezza Rice, Alberto Gonzales, and John Bolton, who testified only reluctantly (about far more serious matters, such as weapons and torture) and could lie with impunity.  But if he said: "The responsibility is mine. Write it down, Fischer is to blame" then he must bear the consequences and submit his resignation. 

Tägliche Vertuschung

Große Überraschung Nr. 1: (Focus 26.4.2005)

Den US-Soldaten ist während der Befreiung der italienischen Journalistin Giuliana Sgrena im Irak kein Fehlverhalten nachzuweisen.
Das ergab eine amerikanische Militäruntersuchung zu dem Fall. US-Fernsehsender berichteten am Montag (Ortszeit) unter Berufung auf hohe Pentagon-Beamte, nach der Freilassung der entführten Journalistin Sgrena hätten die Italiener ihre Fahrt zum Flughafen offenbar nicht mit dem US-Kontrollpunkt koordiniert. Es werde kein Disziplinarverfahren gegen die Soldaten eingeleitet werden, meldete CNN.

Der Geheimdienstmitarbeiter Nicola Calipari hatte am 4. März die nach einmonatiger Geiselhaft im Irak freigelassene Journalistin zum Flughafen bringen wollen. Dabei wurde das Auto mit den Italienern von US-Soldaten beschossen.

Also jetzt dürfen auch Koalitionspartner ohne Konsequenzen getötet werden. Herr Berlusconi, unser Präsident könnte sich keinen besseren Pudel wünschen.

Große Überraschung Nr. 2: (NZZ Online 26.4.2005)

Suche nach Massenvernichtungswaffen beendet

Unterdessen stellte der amerikanische Chefinspekteur Charles Duelfer seine Suche nach Massenvernichtungswaffen im Irak ein. Dabei bekräftigte er, dass sein Team trotz intensivster Nachforschungen keine solchen Waffen gefunden habe, wie aus seinem am Montag veröffentlichten Abschlussbericht hervorgeht. Damit wurden die 18-monatigen Untersuchungen der so genannten Iraq Survey Group offiziell beendet. Der 92-seitige Abschlussbericht stellt eine Ergänzung dar zu dem rund 1500 Seiten umfassenden Dokument, das Duelfer bereits im vergangenen Oktober vorgelegt hat. Darin hiess es, der Irak habe vor dem Krieg von 2003 keine Massenvernichtungswaffen besessen. Es habe aber Anzeichen dafür gegeben, dass der gestürzte Präsident Saddam Hussein über entsprechende Pläne verfügt habe.

Das haben Millionen von uns vor dem Krieg geahnt und auch gesagt, und wurden deshalb von unserem Praesidenten,von seinen Vasallen, und von der US-Presse als "Feiglinge", "Verräter" und "Terroristen-Freunde" bezeichnet.  Jetzt vermag ich nur zu sagen: Sorry Everybody. We tried our best.  Half of America. 

Abu Ghraib and Selective Morality

As the United States lurches towards a theocracy, it is clear that the media have already gotten the message.  I made the mistake of watching American television over the weekend.  CNN has become the "all Jesus, all the time network".  On one network, I watched a group of celebate male priests talk about the urgent need to control women's reproductive choices.  On another network, I watched a group of (mostly male) evangelical Christians - led by a US senator - speak to America about the need to destroy to US constitution, so that right-wing "Christian" judges can be appointed to exert control over women's reproductive choices.  Unfortunately, not one of these Christian leaders mentioned the issue that the world sees as a moral scandal:  the illegal detention and torture of prisoners in Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the outsourcing of prisoner torture through the policy of "extraordinary rendition."  Over the weekend the US army exonerated 4 of 5 commanders in Iraq for the scandal at Abu Graib that shocked the world.  Today's Frankfurter Rundschau sees this as part of the pattern of whitewash by the Bush administration:

Das Muster ist bekannt. Wieder liegt im US-Kongress ein Untersuchungsbericht des Pentagon über den Folter-Skandal von Abu Ghraib vor. Man kann sie schon nicht mehr zählen. Und man ahnt, was drinsteht. Wieder endet die Verantwortlichkeit auf unterer Ebene, diesmal bei Reservegeneralin Janis Karpinski, seinerzeit Chefin der 800. Militärpolizeibrigade, der Folter-Einheit. Sie erhielt eine Rüge und wurde vom Dienst suspendiert.
(...)
  Zunächst ließ sich die Politik den Persilschein ausstellen. Nun haben die Militärs es den Bush, Rumsfeld & Co nachgemacht. Bleiben jene jämmerlichen Gestalten, die man von den Fotos kennt: das Mädchen mit der Hundeleine, der Sergeant mit der Faust und dem satanischen Grinsen. Nur weiß man inzwischen, dass auch anderswo in Irak Gefangene misshandelt wurden, in Afghanistan, in Guantanamo Bay, in den geheimen Folterkammern der CIA. Der Gefangenenskandal geht weiter. Der Skandal der Vertuschung auch.

The Austrian Die Presse notes that the prisoners that suffered, and in 108 cases died, in US custody have been forgotten.  Certainly they have been forgotten by the US press and the religous leaders.  But not by Human Rights Watch.  HRW has called for a special prosecutor to investigate top Bush administration officials.  Read HRW's comprehensive report here.